Discover everything
Blockrise has to offer.

Bitcoin-backed lending has grown into a multibillion-dollar market, yet the question of how much collateral a lender needs across Bitcoin market cycles has never been empirically tested with a decade of daily data.

The Loan-to-Value ratio (LTV) represents the loan amount as a percentage of the Bitcoin collateral posted.

This paper stress-tests daily loan originations from January 2016 to March 2026 across four LTV tiers, measuring the worst-case outcome over each loan's full term.

At a 20% origination LTV, only 1.2% of 12-month loans were liquidated, compared to 36.1% at 60% LTV.
A Monte Carlo simulation of 10,000 Bitcoin price paths shows liquidation probability rising from 3.4% at 20% LTV to 42.8% at 60% LTV.
Historical survival curves show that to protect 95% of all past originations, a lender would need to cap initial LTV at 28.5% for 12-month loans and 23.9% for 24-month loans, both below thresholds commonly used in the industry today.

Short research summary available now. Full research paper with complete methodology launching Thursday 22nd of April

The gap is 34.9 percentage points

The results are stark. At a 20% origination LTV, only 1.2% of 12-month loans across 3,355 originations are liquidated over the entire dataset. At 60% LTV, that figure reaches 36.1% — a difference driven entirely by how much buffer exists when Bitcoin prices fall. The survival of a Bitcoin-backed loan is primarily dependent on one number: the LTV at origination.

What the data makes clear is that the distinction is not that 60% LTV performs badly in crashes, it fails broadly across regimes. The 2018 crypto winter, COVID in March 2020, the Luna collapse, the FTX crash: each event tells a different story about the 60% LTV tier. Meanwhile, 20% LTV only fails in the most extreme events, when Bitcoin drops more than 76.5% from origination within the loan term.

"36.1% of all 12-month loans originated at 60% LTV were liquidated between January 2016 and March 2025, compared to just 1.2% at 20% LTV. The LTV at origination determines nearly everything."

The 2021 cohort sharpens the point. For loans originated at 60% LTV heading into the 2022 bear market, the liquidation rate through that single cycle reached 82.7%, compared to 0% at 20% LTV. The same period, different LTV, entirely different outcomes.

How low does the LTV need to be?

Historical survival curves across all regimes from 2016 to 2026 draw a clean line. To protect 95% of all past loan originations, a lender would need to cap initial LTV at 24.0% for 12-month loans and 22.0% for 24-month loans, both below the thresholds commonly used in the industry. The 90% survival threshold eases the requirement to 30.0% and 25.0% respectively.

‍

Notably, the consistent gap between 12-month and 24-month loan survival explains the same phenomenon seen across loan durations: a longer term creates more opportunities for the loan to cross the liquidation threshold. Yet at 20% LTV, the difference between a 12-month and 24-month term adds just 0.21 percentage points of additional liquidation risk — suggesting that at this level of collateral, loan duration becomes almost irrelevant. The dominant variable is the collateral level, not the duration

Risk does not grow in a straight line

A Monte Carlo simulation of 10,000 Bitcoin price paths over a 5-year horizon reinforces and extends the historical findings. At a 20% origination LTV, a loan faces a 5.6% chance of liquidation over five years. At 60% LTV, that figure climbs to 48.4%. The increase is not linear.

Moving from 20% to 30% LTV adds about 5.7 percentage points of liquidation risk over five years. Moving from 50% to 60% LTV adds nearly 14.8 percentage points for the same 10-point increase. The efficiency frontier divides naturally into three zones: a Safe zone below 30%, a Caution zone between 30% and 50%, and a Danger zone above 50%. In the Danger zone, borrowers are penalised disproportionately for every additional percentage point of leverage, while the upper end of the LTV range offers little meaningful protection relative to the risk taken on.

What this means for lenders

The research makes a case that Bitcoin-backed lending is not inherently risky — it is structurally risky when initial LTV levels are set without reference to the full distribution of Bitcoin price behaviour across cycles. A 30% LTV ceiling, currently considered conservative by industry standards, still leaves a lender exposed to meaningful liquidation risk across longer time horizons. The data suggests that a structurally safe threshold sits closer to 25%.

The full research paper, publishing next week, includes complete methodology, the full dataset across all four LTV tiers, additional cohort analysis, and sensitivity testing on the Monte Carlo calibration. This short summary provides the core findings for immediate use.

‍

Blockrise™ is a trademark of Blockrise Capital B.V. in the Netherlands and other countries. Blockrise Capital B.V. is a private limited liability company registered in the Netherlands, under Chamber of Commerce number 74879782. Blockrise Capital B.V. holds a MiCAR licence with number 41000029, issued by the Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM). Blockrise Lending B.V. is a group company and does not hold a MiCAR-license.

February tested the resolve of every bitcoin holder. After grinding down from €68.000 to €54.000 and breaking through key support levels, BTC found itself in unfamiliar territory. It was caught between resistance overhead and the psychological floor of the Realized Price below. While tentative signs of stabilisation emerged by early March, conviction remains scarce across the market.

Beyond price action, the crypto world grappled with serious questions about market structure. Jane Street faced insider trading allegations tied to the Terra collapse. Iran's growing crypto economy drew fresh attention amid escalating conflict. Private credit markets began showing their first real cracks since the boom began.

Meanwhile, Blockrise pushed forward. With the launch of Secured Lending and Easy, the announcement of the partnership with Bitvavo and connecting with some of the sharpest minds in Bitcoin at the Blockstream Summit in Italy. There is growth. Through it all, Blockrise’s Fundamentals strategy held steady, outperforming Bitcoin's decline while managing risk with discipline.

Market Update

A brief analysis on Bitcoin and Blockrise Fundamentals:

Bitcoin analysis

February was a tough month for Bitcoin. BTC ground lower from roughly €63k–€68k at the start of the month to the €54k–€58k range by early March. This marked a 47% drawdown from its October 2025 all-time high. The defining moment came when price broke below the True Market Mean (around €68k), the average cost basis of active participants. This level had served as the market's floor since the ATH. That level flipped to resistance, leaving Bitcoin trapped in a corridor between ~€67k overhead and the Realised Price (~€47k) below. On-chain data shows this structure closely mirrors the first half of 2022. With roughly 9.2 million BTC now held at a loss, ETF flows persistently negative, and large holders showing passivity rather than accumulation, the market clearly lacks conviction. By early March, there were tentative signs that the worst of the selling pressure was fading. Spot sell-side activity was easing and momentum indicators were lifting off their lows. However, these look more like exhaustion than a genuine turn. For now, the €51k–€59k demand zone is providing support. A break below it would bring the ~€47k level into focus. The data points to a market that's stabilising rather than recovering.

Fundamentals

Blockrise offers comprehensive care with its asset management strategy called "Fundamentals." This strategy involves managing assets in Bitcoin versus an euro position, reassessing and adjusting these positions monthly.

Blockrise’s portfolio strategy delivered a return of -13,66%, outperforming Bitcoin's decline of nearly 15%. Despite significant price volatility, our investment team held our Bitcoin position steady at 92,5%. The reason is straightforward: the model of Blockrise measures the intrinsic value of the Bitcoin network, which moved in parallel with market price. While Bitcoin's price declined, the degree of overvaluation remained stable. Our investment approach is built on the probability distribution of price movements and implements risk management protocols to optimize our clients' risk-to-reward profile. Our models answer a fundamental question: "Does the current value at risk align with the relative valuation of the Bitcoin network?"

Bitcoin's market price is a critical component of Blockrise’s investment decisions, but it's one factor among several. The market price contains considerable noise. It may be subject to political influences. It presents significant forecasting challenges over extended time horizons. The models of Blockrise aren't infallible, no quantitative framework is. That said, the model demonstrates a strong accuracy rate, which drives long-term performance.

Crypto Highlights

An overview of the most notable events in crypto:

Jane Street's alleged insider trading

Over the last few weeks, global newspapers have been filled with the story concerning Jane Street's involvement in the implosion of Terraform Labs in 2022. The complaint centres on the 7th of May 2022. That day, Terraform withdrew 150 million UST from Curve3pool, a decentralised exchange, as part of a liquidity migration that had not been publicly announced. Within 10 minutes, a wallet linked to Jane Street pulled 85 million UST from the same pool, the largest swap the platform had ever processed. The allegation is that this constituted non-public material information and caused a liquidity crunch for UST.

Presented this way, it sounds like a very convincing story. However, it is entirely possible that these events have nothing to do with each other. One could even argue that the transaction from Terraform was on-chain and therefore public. Many investors who were affected by the $40 billion collapse of Terraform Labs, and everything that came after, would love nothing more than for Jane Street to be the reason for their losses.

The facts are that Terraform Labs was a fraudulent scheme, where an algorithm was supposed to maintain stability when it could not. The market was craving institutional players as it matured to increase adoption. But the moment they arrive they become the ones to blame. Jane Street enters any market for one thing and one thing alone: volatility. Their business model is to exploit volatility for profit, taking a piece of your pie. Do not be deceive, Jane Street made over $4 billion in profit in 2025. They are here to win.

Iran's $7,8 billion crypto market draws fresh attention amid war

The US-Israeli war on Iran is putting renewed focus on the country's $7,8 billion cryptocurrency market. Citizens and authorities have increasingly turned to it for storing and sending money during periods of turmoil.

Analytics firms Chainalysis and Elliptic produced reports this week showing sharp spikes in outflows from Iranian crypto exchanges immediately after air strikes hit the country. The sums were paltry relative to the total market. However, they suggested that individuals are withdrawing funds for security, that government entities are doing the same to make payments that skirt sanctions, or some combination of both, according to experts.

Chainalysis determined that roughly $2,3 million left Iranian crypto exchanges during the peak hour after air strikes began, 873% above the normal average hourly amount. Elliptic observed a 700% spike in outflows from Iran's biggest crypto exchange, Nobitex. Iran's crypto market has been rapidly growing and is closely watched because of the geopolitical tensions surrounding it. Its rise in activity has also come against the backdrop of sharp currency devaluation and double-digit inflation last year, part of a deep economic crisis caused partly by international sanctions.

Macro Economy

An overview of relevant global economic events:

The great divide

Over the last few weeks, a number of prominent executives have publicly weighed in on the growing risks within private credit. The foundation for this rising discussion has been laid by several high-profile blowups over recent months. Jamie Dimon stated that financial firms are "doing dumb things" in risky lending. Blue Owl Capital Inc. decided to halt quarterly withdrawals from one of its retail funds. Danny Moses, a "Big Short" money manager, acknowledged that the current signs rhyme with the crisis of 2007. On the other hand, the CEO of Goldman Sachs does not see significant cause for concern.

Whether the true believers or the skeptics are right, it is increasingly clear that private credit is facing its first major test of confidence. The question is whether it can withstand sustained pressure from concerns that one of its favoured sectors, software, will be upended by artificial intelligence.

On the brink of an energy crisis

The war on Iran threatens to deal a severe blow to a global economy still grappling with the impact of the historic tariff hike. For Europe, sustained higher energy prices would push the economy to the brink of recession. For the US, they would place the Federal Reserve in an impossible position, caught between a war that pushes inflation higher and a president demanding that interest rates come down. For China, the end of discounted Iranian oil imports adds to the strain from Trump's tariffs and a persistent real estate collapse.

European natural gas futures increased by almost 80% as markets reacted to the war on Iran. The Strait of Hormuz, only 50 kilometres wide, has been effectively paralysed. Under normal conditions, it accounts for 25% of global oil exports, equivalent to close to 20 million barrels a day. However, due to the tension and close proximity to the conflict, Saudi Arabia has closed its largest refinery and Qatar has shuttered the world's biggest liquefied natural gas facility. In addition, China has demanded its top refiners suspend exports of diesel and gasoline as the escalating conflict disrupts the arrival of crude. Although Europe is not directly reliant on these countries for energy imports, others are, which drives up prices across the board.

Disclaimer

The lending service itself is not a MiCAR-regulated product. Bitcoin-backed loans are offered by Blockrise Lending B.V.

‍

Rotterdam, 9 February 2026 – Blockrise, the MiCAR-licensed Bitcoin platform based in the Netherlands, today introduces Easy Invest and its group activity Secured Lending. Through its group company Blockrise Lending B.V., private and business lenders can earn up to 6% fixed interest on EUR with Secured Lending, backed by bitcoin collateral. Blockrise also introduces Easy Invest, which automates recurring bitcoin purchases for long-term investors. Both services are available immediately.

Secured Lending

Following the successful launch of Bitcoin-backed loans in late 2025, Blockrise Lending B.V. now opens the other side of that market. With Secured Lending, lenders provide EUR to Blockrise Lending and receive a fixed interest rate in return.

Each loan issued by Blockrise Lending is secured by bitcoin collateral held in segregated wallets by Stichting Blockrise, an independent foundation. The collateral is worth at least twice the loan amount at origination and is verifiable on-chain at any time. If the value of the collateral declines, predefined margin call and liquidation protocols protect the lender's position.

Interest rates are currently up to 6% per annum, with a minimum of EUR 100,000. All terms are defined upfront in the term sheet.

The rationale behind the programme is described in the Bitcoin Lending Standards 2026, a paper published by Blockrise earlier this year. It outlines the structural properties that make bitcoin collateral different from traditional forms of security and proposes standards for responsible lending practices in this emerging market.

"After launching bitcoin-backed loans, the most common question from our network was: how do I participate as a lender? Secured Lending is our answer. It is simply EUR in and EUR out, with bitcoin working as collateral in the background. The offering was already there, now we make it public for anyone keen to participate." says Jos Lazet, CEO at Blockrise.

Easy Invest

Automated bitcoin accumulation is now brought to the clients of Blockrise Capital. Clients set up a recurring bank transfer and include a keyword in the payment reference: "autobuy" to convert deposits directly into bitcoin, or "autojoin" to allocate them to the Fundamentals Portfolio, Blockrise's managed bitcoin strategy. Each deposit is executed automatically upon receipt.

The feature is designed for long-term investors who want to build a bitcoin position gradually, without timing the market. Clients can adjust or stop at any time by changing their payment reference, and there are no additional costs involved.

Disclaimers

Secured Lending and bitcoin involve risk. The value of bitcoin can decline, and protective mechanisms do not eliminate the possibility of loss. Secured Lending is not a deposit and is not covered by any deposit guarantee scheme. This service is offered by Blockrise Lending B.V., a group company of Blockrise Capital B.V. Blockrise Lending B.V. is not regulated under MiCAR.

About Blockrise

Founded in 2017, Blockrise is a bitcoin-only platform based in Rotterdam offering custody, brokerage, asset management, legacy planning, and bitcoin-backed loans. Blockrise Capital B.V. holds a MiCAR license issued by the AFM since November 2025. Visit www.blockrise.com for more information.

###

Media contact

Blockrise Group B.V. | press@blockrise.com | www.blockrise.com | +31 10 848 1741